Content uploaded by Syed Shah Alam
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Syed Shah Alam on Dec 20, 2018
Content may be subject to copyright.
Int. J Sup. Chain. Mgt Vol. 7, No. 5, October 2018
572
Social Support, Trust and Purchase Intention in
Social Commerce Era
Nurkhalida Makmor #1, Syed Shah Alam #2, Norzalita Abd Aziz #3
# School of Business, National University of Malaysia, Bangi Selangor, Malaysia
1kellsweetie84@gmail.com
2shahalam@ukm.edu.my
3eita@ukm.edu.my
Abstract— Due to increasing numbers of purchases in the
online industry has created trust as a critical path in an
online environment. In fact, it is more critical when trust
has identified as crucial in online commerce. Consumers
are reluctant to have a purchase intention when they
distrust towards the website. Consumers nowadays, who
represent the future buyers, seem to have reasons how
they can trust in online commerce and ultimately lead
them to have purchase intention. Drawn from social
support theory, trust and purchase intention, this research
empirically is to test which characters of social support
(emotional and informational support) have significant
influence purchase intention and to test whether the trust
has a significant influence on purchase intention.
Furthermore, to test the mediating effects of trust in social
commerce. The research conducted in the quantitative
approach and used non-probability (convenience
sampling) by using questionnaire surveys. A correlation
and multiple regression analyses were applied. A total of
200 respondents participated. Our results shed some lights
on social commerce literature. The result confirms that
there is a relationship between social supports such as
emotional and informational support on purchase
intention. Finding also revealed that trust as fully
mediates the relationship between the variables. This
research can entirely contribute to the literature by
providing and introducing to both marketers and
consumers by identifying the factors influencing purchase
intention in social commerce.
Keywords— Social Commerce; Social Support; Trust;
Purchase Intention
1. Introduction
Social commerce is a website and application of
combination from various users to participate and
collaborate in an online network. The innovation of
information technology has opened a strategic driver to
consumer more easily to communicate with each other.
In fact, the increasing popularity of social media
nowadays has to create new communication tools and
more comfortable interaction with the platforms.
Recently, [1]identified Facebook and Twitter as top
social media to communicate with each other.
Specifically, social media has allowed consumers to
participate in sharing their opinions and suggestions
that would benefit consumers. According to [2], social
media is an excellent platform where people can share
their experiences, jokes, videos and comments from
friends. Hence, social media qualified as a tool for
engagement from e-commerce to a new form of social
commerce. Unlike other technologies, social commerce
has had a rapid intention. Social commerce is a
technology advancement, offers various functions such
as comparing, selling, buying, reviewing and sharing
product experiences [3].
Specifically, social commerce has changed the
activities into social communities when collaboration
among users in the platform gets into the friendly
conversation. Perhaps, in the early stage of social
commerce has opened a new platform for people to
seek advice and information about knowledge-based
consumers’ experiences. By considering this, people
started to the conversation on the platform as to get
valuable information when they are less known.
Supported by [4]consumers are likely to choose to
participate in the platforms when they found that
platforms will benefit them. According to [5]the
discussion in the platform becomes more important and
meaningful when social support exists. Previous
research found that consumers like to share shopping
experiences with their friends on the platform [6].
Moreover, [7]affirms that social support such as
emotional and informational support is vital in social
commerce platforms as it helps users confident towards
the products or services that lead to purchase intention.
Specifically, social support is needed in online
commerce when consumers face difficulties and have
less knowledge [8]. Additionally, social support is
crucial in social commerce by enhancing consumers
knowledgeable, confident and in turn, influencing them
to trust and leads them to purchase intention. In fact,
these social supports has potential influence the trust as
well as reduce perceived risk in social commerce
platforms [7]
______________________________________________________________
International Journal of Supply Chain Management
IJSCM, ISSN: 2050-7399 (Online), 2051-3771 (Print)
Copyright © ExcelingTech Pub, UK (http://excelingtech.co.uk/)
Int. J Sup. Chain. Mgt Vol. 7, No. 5, October 2018
573
According to [9] reported that 96 percent of Americans
had made an online purchase in their life while
Malaysia reported 65.7 percent users’ penetrated online
market and expected will increase in 76.8 percent in
2021. Supported by [10]found in 2016, 48.8 percent
consumers make online purchases as compared to only
35.5 percent in a previous year in Malaysia. Besides,
the Malaysian [11] reported that the most significant
Malaysian revenue was electronic media and expected
will increase to US$478 Million in 2018 compared to
US$ 425 Million in 2017. Despite the rising of these
percentages, this study is to find the factors that
influence consumers trust to have purchase intention in
social commerce. The fastest technology growth and
the rising number of users purchases in the platform
making trust as an issue and vital in online commerce
[12], [13]. Besides, previous literature revealed that
trust as an issue in an online network [12], [14], [15].
On the other hand, [16] observed that trust related to
risk and security. Furthermore, [17] mentioned that trust
as a critical element in social commerce due to content
sharing, as it involves individuals participation.
Trust is an on-going issue in an online
network. For instance, [18] stated that five major
concerns that occur in an online purchase such as the
product are not the same as advertised, the product is
not reachable to buyers, risk and security, lack of
confidence and skill and fraud. For this reasons, it is
more critical when trust has been overlooked in social
commerce [19]. Some research has shown that two
factors can increase trust in online networks such as
social commerce and social support [7]. However, [20]
reported a few studies are looking at trust in social
commerce. This research empirically tested that social
support influence trust, indirectly, influence purchase
intention. [19] argued individuals are only doing the
transaction when their trust exists. In contrast,
consumers may be reluctant to have purchase intention
in social commerce if they distrust towards the website.
It is vital at this point to assess social support from the
expert and experiences point of view and thus a priority
in social commerce. In fact, limited studies are looking
at social support in social commerce [4]. Moreover,
online social support has not been understood and need
more depth research in an online context [21]. Since
this community is free and convenient, this may
influence the users’ interest to join and participate in
discussion groups as well as confident [22].
Nevertheless, up to the researcher’s knowledge, there
are no studies in the literature use trust as a mediator
between the relationships of social support (emotional
support and informational support) with purchase
intention. Hence, this area of research deserved to be
studied. Thus, this research aims to test which
characters of social support (emotional and
informational support) have significant influence
purchase intention and to test whether the trust has a
significant influence on purchase intention. Also, to test
the mediating effect of trust on the relationship between
social support (emotional and informational support)
with purchase intention. The paper includes a literature
review and background of the study including theory,
hypotheses development, further a conceptual model,
the methodology including results and following
discussion and conclusions.
2. Literature review
This study uses Social Support Theory to model
essential factors influencing trust and purchase
intention. Since the Social Support Theory is the most
appropriate for explaining the relationship of this study
thus, this study is selected the theory as a precursor of
consumers behaviour. The literature review will focus
on the underpinning theory and development of
hypotheses further will discuss a conceptual model of
the study.
2.1 Social support theory
Social support is about people perception for those who
are being responsible and cared for a problem that
occurs. Social support has been studied in a various
wide range of disciplines such as psychology,
sociology, medicine, nursing and health studies [23].
However, this study is highlight psychology context
that explains how people perception towards the
information delivered based on experienced. Social
support came from various sources, such as family,
friends, organisations and neighbours. However,
according to the context of this study, the support
comes from groups in the social network. Social
support defined as individual action when received
information from the platform[4] Moreover, [24]
defined social support as people concern, love, care, to
give the support to solve people problem. Social
support theory has proposed by [25] and explained that
how individual act when received information that
indirectly influences the individual to become well-
being behaviour. To be specific, the theory highlights
how social support can protect people from stress health
and anxiety towards specific events. As applied to
social support this study is about social commerce
platform that collaborates with various peoples and
different background to share the valuable information
for the certain of products or services. This platform not
only sharing knowledge but, to sharing some problems,
sharing a suggestion and receiving support to each
other. When social support exists on the platform, this
will enhance people confident, and trust indirectly may
reduce people stress towards uncertain information that
finally contributes to purchasing intention.
According to [26] social support categorised into four
types such as emotional, instrumental, informational
and appraisal. Furthermore, [27] classified social
Int. J Sup. Chain. Mgt Vol. 7, No. 5, October 2018
574
support into three categories such as emotional,
tangible, and informational support. On the other hand,
[19] classified social support in two types such as
informational and emotional support. Nevertheless for
this study, social support measure in two ways such as
emotional support and informational support.
According to [28], [29] these two ways emotional and
informational support is the most suitable constructs to
be measured in an online network. Emotional support
defined as personal empathy, concern, love, trust,
acceptance, intimacy, encouragement, and caring [30].
Meanwhile, informational support defined as valuable
information by someone who has the experienced that
contains cognitive feelings such as interpretations,
plans, and suggestions. Broadening the concept of
emotional and informational support, consumers may
share their experiences related to the product or services
to help other consumer’s problems and support to each
other.
Social support produced when communication between
individuals undertaken in a dynamic platform such as
online communities. The dynamic platform becomes
attractive when individuals are supportive of their peers
through emotional and informational support [31], [32].
Social support is a constructive element in online
communities as it enhances trust in an individual over a
decision. Previous research [33] revealed that social
interaction and support has the potential to influence
trust. As consumers, they are deemed to feel the anxiety
to participate in an online community when they bound
to be risks and uncertainty in an online environment
[34]. When social support in place, consumers more
influenced to feel trust if they are received positive
support from other consumers of the same network
[35].
2.2 Trust
Trust qualified as an essential element influencing the
successful relationship [36]. Trust is a primary concern
in an online purchase, which need to ensure a secure
cyber platform environment for consumers. Indeed,
with the growth of social networking sites, consumers
have some concern when it comes to purchasing over
the internet. Trust is a central issue in an online network
due to uncertainty information and social transactions
[34]. Furthermore, trust is vital to the online network.
[12] also qualified the trust as a critical driver for
successful businesses [37] as well as consumers.
Similarly to [38] pointed out that trust is the most
significant factors to determine the successful online
businesses. The advancement of information
technology makes consumers likely to seek advice from
the online community and search for individual
comments that they can trust. For this reason, in a
trusting environment, consumers tend to help engage
and active in social activities. Also, the useful
information obtained in the platform may use for them
before purchase decision [39].
Specifically, trust can found in various relationship.
These relationships are crucial to determining the
outcome at the end. Trust, therefore, identified as a
significant factor in an economic and social
environment involving reliance and ambiguity [40].
Various conceptualisations of trust have offered over
the years, with definitions covering notions as diverse
as a positive outcome. Previous research [40] defined
“Trust, in a broad sense, is the confidence a person has
in his or her favourable expectations of what other
people will do, based in many cases, on previous
interactions”. On the other hand, [41] identified trust as
people believe in specific information that has been
provided by another party. For this research, trust
defines as the degree to which social support
environment willing to put into operation its
commitment and promises.
There are various characteristics of trust, and it depends
on the purpose of the study. Previous research said that
trust has two main characteristics in an online
environment such as benevolence and credibility [7],
[42]–[44]. Another researcher identified trust in three
characteristics such as ability, credibility, and
benevolence [45]. Credibility defined as people trust
towards the information honestly and reliable [44]. To
be specific, credibility based trust will rely on
reputation information delivered in the platform.
Moreover, benevolence defined as the buyer makes
repeated purchases in an online network [44].
Meanwhile, ability refers to the right skills that belong
to the trusted party. According to [46] benevolence and
credibility are two different types of trust building and
most well-known in online commerce. Hence, this
study considers two characteristics of trust such as
benevolence and credibility. Credibility encompasses
integrity, ability and honest by providing information
useful that would influence the intention to buy at the
end [47]. For this circumstance, in the present
environment, social support has the potential to shape
new connection interconnectivity between consumers in
the platform, to enhance trust on which platform they
communicate. To be specific, social support is
supportive information in online communities as it
develops trust for own individual decision. Supported
by [48] social support and interaction communication
would influence trust in online commerce.
2.3 Purchase Intention
Purchase intention is crucial determinant before the
actual purchase of specific products or services in the
future. Similarly, previous literature stated that
purchase intention is good predictor direct to real future
behaviour [49]. What is cross in the consumer's mind,
most probably shows an intention to purchase from
Int. J Sup. Chain. Mgt Vol. 7, No. 5, October 2018
575
them. Indeed, the term of purchase intention in social
commerce is vital for both organisations and
consumers. In particular, to influence purchase
intention among consumers in social commerce, might
require other factors and helping them to have purchase
intention at the end. The factors are in various
characteristics such as brand, price, quality, innovation,
information, brand performance and other factors
including impulsiveness [50]. For this study, the factors
might come from an online community platform and
support. According to [51] how large information
delivered on the community platform it may affect the
intention of performing a specific behaviour. Therefore,
before purchasing the product, consumers will
recognise the product, find the information and evaluate
product performance that is worth for them to buy.
When consumers knowledge is high, this will lead them
to have purchase intention on the network [52]. In
fact,[53] argued, when purchase intention in an online
network is lack, this will affect the development of
electronic commerce as a whole.
Intention to purchase is a construct of the technology
acceptance model (TAM) also, qualified as dominant
theories in predicting an individual intends to use a
system [34]. [54] stated that two core theories in
predicting an individual intention to use information
system, which is TAM [55] and the theory of planned
behaviour [56]. Previous expert defined purchase
intention as one specific task with rational decision
makers and belief in the process of making a purchase
[56]. Furthermore, [57] defined purchase intention as
consumers who are willing to engage and make an
online purchase. Thus, this study defines purchase
intention as consumers who are willing to engage in the
online purchase of the online network.
3. Theoretical framework and
hypotheses development
This research aims to examine the determinants
character of social support (emotional and
informational support) with purchase intention. This
research also to test a mediating trust to increase
researchers understanding of social commerce and how
emerging social factors will influence to trust and
finally lead to purchase intention. This research used
social support theory, that explains individual
perception towards specific events. Figure 1 depicts the
conceptual framework, along with social support
(emotional and informational support) on purchase
intention. The researcher also added trust as on-going
issues in social commerce.
Figure 1. Research framework
2.4 Social support and purchase intention
Social support theory emphasises how social
relationship influence support behaviour and contribute
to health to protect from adverse stress. [6] theorised, it
is obligatory as consumers to share information and
recommendations in the platform to expand the
relationship and to share product information and
support with one to another. Social support defined as
“the social resources that persons perceive to be
available or that are provided to them by non-
professionals in the context of both formal support
groups and informal helping relationships”[58].
The reason why social support needed on the platform it
is because the supportive information would enhance
social relationship longer and closer to exchange
information knowledge [6]. When consumers feel
comfortable and confident towards the information
delivered, this will enhance them to have purchase
intention in the future. For instance, making purchase
decisions sometimes involve stressful behaviour. The
stress becomes higher when the decision relates to price
or a wide range of choices, consequently, by receiving
social support in the platform thus, would help them for
best decision before that they can purchase. According
to [8], when information delivered by experiences
consumers in the platform, it may help and support
other consumers before a purchase decision.
The social community is vital in determining whether
consumers willing to use or not. In fact, if consumers
receive support from their friends or any relatives on
the platform, the consumers are more feel confident and
self-assured [28]. For this reason, social support is
progressively turning into a supportive advice statement
and environment in social commerce platform [59].
Previous study postulate that online communication and
social interaction would affect purchase decision [60].
According to [6] the advice would encourage
consumers to share their shopping experiences and
sharing information knowledge, indirectly influence
the other consumers towards intention.
Moreover, social communication in the
platform can affect the performance of the product
indirectly influence behavior [61]. In other respect,
Int. J Sup. Chain. Mgt Vol. 7, No. 5, October 2018
576
found that social support has significant effects towards
intentions [6]. Similar with [32] stated social support
significant effect social commerce intention. Thus,
Information provided on the platform would influence
purchase intention [62]. By considering these
statements and justifications, therefore, it is reasonable
to assume that social support (emotional support and
informational support) influence purchase intention in
social commerce. Thus, this study proposes:
H1: Emotional support significantly influences
purchase intentions
H2: Informational support significantly influence
purchase intentions
2.5 Trust as mediator
Previous studies have used social support theory in
online network community that is mainly looking into
health studies [63]–[66] In the health studies, social
support theory is mainly vital to encouraging and
helping people confident and trust to deal with their
medical condition. Based on this study, social support
will reduce consumers stress and anxiety by providing
advice and information support that influence trust and
purchase intention at the end. According to [67] the
reason consumers join the online network, for
observing social support that able to advise, to support
information and exchange relevant information.
Supported by previous studies, social support can create
community friendship as well as build trust with each
other [68], [69].
Trust defined as “a broad sense, is the confidence a
person has in his or her favourable expectations of what
other people will do, based in many cases, on previous
interactions” [40]. Previous literature identified trust as
a mediating to electronic system transaction [70], [71].
According to [72], there are three rules need to be
considered to ensure the construct is qualified as a
mediator which are first, the path between the
independent variable and the dependent variable must
be significant. Second, the path between the
independent variable and the mediator must be
significant. Third, the path between the mediator and
the dependent variable must be significant. Fourth, the
path between the independent and dependent variable
must significantly reduce when the mediator introduce.
Up to the researcher’s knowledge, there are no studies
works that measured trusts as a mediator between the
relationship of social support (informational and
emotional support) with purchase intention. However,
recent work by [31] postulates that social support
enhances trust in online commerce. Similarly with [73]
stated that social support do influence trust.
Additionally, consumers will become confident and
trust when social support exists, this is because they
believed someone’s support that has the experiences
and knowledge towards specific event [74]. According
to [68] active social supports ultimately enhance users
trust. When trust perceived to be high, this will lead to
purchase intention. Previous experts found trust
influence purchase intention in the online network [7],
[34]. Specifically, social support is vital in the online
network as it influences consumers’ confidence and
trusts towards information statement. The advice from
close friends and relatives on the platform could see as
helpful sources and supportive at the end. By providing
answers to questions may help consumers more assured
before a purchase decision. Based on the social support
theory and the empirical study reviewed above, this
study proposes the following hypotheses:
H3: Trust significantly influence purchase intentions
H4: Trust fully mediated the relationship between
emotional support purchase intentions
H5: Trust fully mediated the relationship between
informational support and purchase intentions
3. Methodology
The present study conducted to test the relationship
between the constructs. Thus a questionnaire was
developed for this study purpose. The research
employed a survey to collect the data which described
below.
3.1 Instrument development
The research had analysed five sections constructs:
section A, (knowing social commerce and used)
meanwhile, section B referring to social support
furthermore, section C about trust, followed by section
D was purchase intention and finally section E is
demographic. For this study, a questionnaire developed.
Respondents were asked to judge the given statements
on a 7-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree to 7 =
strongly agree). Previous literature [75] stated that 7
point Likert scales resulted in stronger correlations with
the t-test result. The measurements of social support
based on emotional support and informational support.
Meanwhile, the trust measured by benevolence and
credibility. Furthermore, the measurement of research
outcome is purchase intention. The measurement of
social support adapted from [6]. Meanwhile, trust items
adapted from [12] and purchase intention adapted from
[76].
3.2 Research method and data collection
This study followed an empirical quantitative research
approach. The aim is to understand depth factors
influence consumer trust and purchase intention in
social commerce. This quantitative is known to be most
suitable to be used for information technology. Primary
data collected through the use of a survey questionnaire,
which provides a quantitative approach. The
questionnaire was adapted from previous studies to
Int. J Sup. Chain. Mgt Vol. 7, No. 5, October 2018
577
gather data on the social support, trust and purchase
intention. The questionnaire personally administered to
the respondents. For this study, the target respondents
took students as they are using social networking sites.
According [12] the students are most valid consumers
since they used social networking sites. Moreover,
college and universities students have qualified as
active and heavy internet users compared with other
respondents [77], [78]. About 205 questionnaires were
distributed and collected. A total of 200 were finally
valid from universities and college located in Malaysia.
From the analysis indicated that 90 percent respondents
heard about social commerce and the highest platform
used was Instagram with 48.5 percent, followed by
Facebook with 43 percent, and 5.5 percent used Twitter.
For the demographic analysis indicated that 26.5
percent are male and 73.5 percent from a female. Since
the study focusing student level, the majority indicated
age under 20 until 27 with 68.5 percent and followed by
22.5 under 28 until 37 meanwhile, eight percentages
between 38 until 47.
4. Results
4.1 Reliability analysis
Previous author[79] mentioned that “the reliability of a
measure indicates the extent to which it is without bias
(error free) and hence ensures consistent measurement
across time and the various items in the instrument”.
Reliability is a way of measurement procedure used to
collect a data. As a way to get a valid result in research,
the measurement procedure must be reliable to get a
stable and consistent result. The reliability was
confirmed to be above 0.60, an acceptable value [80],
[81]. Previous researcher [82] suggested a minimum
Cronbach alpha value of 0.7 is enough for the
preliminary research stage. Thus, as shown in Table 1
this study Cronbach alpha was above 0.8 exceed the
minimum value as suggested [82]. Meanwhile, the
composite reliability in this study is higher than 0.9, and
the AVE value exceeds 0.5, which means accept
consistency and convergent reliability of the model.
Table 1. Cronbach alpha analysis
Variables Cronbach alpha
Emotional support .882
Informational support .856
Trust .921
Purchase Intention .893
4.2 Multicollinearity analysis
Multicollinearity refers to a condition where some
independent variables in the models are closely
correlated to one another. The failure to conduct
multicollinearity could expose in the misleading
interpretation of analysis finding [83]. Multicollinearity
accessed by using variance inflation factor (VIF) [83].
According to [84], [85] the right VIF range is about 1.8
to 2.5, and it shows that the variance is uncorrelated.
Previous expert [86] postulate that VIF values below 10
do not expose to multicollinearity. Thus this study VIF
result falls to below 2.0. Hence, the measures selected
do not reach multicollinearity. Therefore, this study was
acceptable.
4.3 Regression analysis
For this study, five hypotheses were tested using
multiple regression analysis. The results revealed that
emotional support and informational support
significantly influence purchase intention thus,
supporting the hypotheses H1 and H2. Moreover, trust
significantly influence purchase intention hence,
supporting the hypothesis H3. Meanwhile, trust found
as fully mediates the relationship between emotional
support and informational support with purchase
intention, therefore, supporting the hypotheses H3 and
H4. The results of multiple regression analysis are
shown in figure 2, figure 3 and figure 4.
Figure 2. Direct effect model with purchase intention
Figure 3. Mediating trust between emotional support
and purchase intention
Int. J Sup. Chain. Mgt Vol. 7, No. 5, October 2018
578
Figure 4. Mediating trust between informational
support and purchase intention
By comparing of all multiple regression and t-values, in
figure 2, 3 and 4, it shows that existence of mediator
contributes to significant result between social support
(emotional and informational support) with purchase
intention.
5. Discussion
This research aims to test which characters of social
support (emotional and informational support) have
significant influence purchase intention. After
conducting an empirical study, the finding revealed that
emotional support significantly influences purchase
intention with (=.196; P<0.005). Similarly,
informational support significantly influences purchase
intention with (=.204; p<0.004). The current study in
line with the previous study confirmed that social
support influence intention [6]. Meanwhile, trust also
found significantly influence purchase intention with
(=3.00; p<0.000). [7] found that trust significant
influence purchase intention in an online network.
Furthermore, this study also to test the mediating effect
of trust between the relationship between emotional
support and informational support with purchase
intention. The result of trust between emotional support
and purchase intention indicated that (=.264;
P<0.000) while, the result of trust between
informational support and purchase intention shown
that (=.260; P<0.000). The result in line with previous
studies found that trust as a fully mediates in the online
network [87], [88]. However, the result contradicts with
previous research [89] found that trust as a partial
mediation on social networking sites. Additionally,
consumers are influenced to join the community
platform when they are less known. When consumers
received information and support in the community
platform, this will enhance their trust level, indirectly
would lead them to purchase intention. In particular, the
information is crucial when it relates to the product cost
and new product in the market.
Concerning mediation in the present study, the
result shows that trust confirmed as fully mediates
between the relationship. The mediating result shows
that all four conditions proposed by [72] fulfilled for
this study. To be specific, the mediating effect of trust
will occur when social support (emotional support and
informational support) has a significant effect on trust
[68], [32]. Meanwhile, trust is significant with purchase
intention in an online network [90]–[92]. Besides, the
relationship between emotional support and
informational support with purchase intention will
reduce and insignificant when trust introduced. Thus,
we conclude that trust in the platform qualified as a
mediating variable in building consumers relationship
in the platform.
6. Practical implication
Specifically, this study offers valuable implications for
both consumers and marketers in the online industry.
The results confirm that emotional and informational
support influence to purchase intention in social
commerce. Moreover, the study finding could be useful
for marketers who intend to market their product
through the online social network. In fact, by
identifying social factors in the online network might
necessary for companies to enhance their sales future.
As consumers prefer to buy from the online network, so
this finding is helping companies to remain competitive
in the online market space.
7. Limitation and future research
The current study only focused on students’ population,
thus, may not be accurate and generalise to whole
consumers’ level. Moreover, this study is only used
multiple regression analysis to measure direct and
indirect relationship that might not be the same result as
compared to PLS or SEM analysis. Moreover, this
study concentrated on Malaysian consumers that could
be different setting in other countries. Therefore, future
research could extend the model by adding different
variables and theories such as social norms and
perceived playfulness. Moreover, future research also
could examine other factors such as brand image or
brand love to see the effect of social factors and
purchase intention in social commerce.
References
[1] M. Mount and M. G. Martinez, “Social Media,”
Calif. Manage. Rev., vol. 56, no. 4, pp. 124–
143, 2014.
[2] S. Hassan, S. Z. A. Nadzim, and N.
Shiratuddin, “Strategic Use of Social Media for
Small Business Based on the AIDA Model,”
Procedia - Soc. Behav. Sci., vol. 172, pp. 262–
269, 2015.
[3] L. Zhou, P. Zhang, and H. D. Zimmermann,
“Social commerce research: An integrated
view,” Electron. Commer. Res. Appl., vol. 12,
no. 2, pp. 61–68, 2013.
[4] N. Hajli and J. Sims, “Social commerce: The
transfer of power from sellers to buyers,”
Int. J Sup. Chain. Mgt Vol. 7, No. 5, October 2018
579
Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change, vol. 94, pp.
350–358, 2015.
[5] X. Lin, D. Zhang, and Y. Li, “Delineating the
dimensions of social support on social
networking sites and their effects: A
comparative model,” Comput. Human Behav.,
vol. 58, pp. 421–430, 2016.
[6] T.-P. Liang, Y.-T. Ho, Y.-W. Li, and E. Turban,
“What Drives Social Commerce: The Role of
Social Support and Relationship Quality,” Int.
J. Electron. Commer., vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 69–90,
2011.
[7] M. Hajli, “A research framework for social
commerce adoption,” Inf. Manag. Comput.
Secur., vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 144–154, 2013.
[8] D.-H. Park, J. Lee, and I. Han, “The Effect of
On-Line Consumer Reviews on Consumer
Purchasing Intention: The Moderating Role of
Involvement,” Int. J. Electron. Commer., vol.
11, no. 4, pp. 125–148, Jul. 2007.
[9] BigCommerce, “Bigcommerce,” 2017.
[Online]. Available:
https://www.bigcommerce.com/blog/ecommerc
e-trends/.
[10] M. Communications and Multimedia
Commission, “Internet Users Survey 2017,” pp.
1–800, 2017.
[11] ECommerce and Statistics, “eCommerce
Statistics Portal Malaysia,” 2017. [Online].
Available:
https://www.statista.com/outlook/243/122/e-
commerce/malaysia#.
[12] N. Hajli, “Social commerce constructs and
consumer’s intention to buy,” Int. J. Inf.
Manage., vol. 35, no. 2, pp. 183–191, 2015.
[13] P. Lal, “Analyzing determinants influencing an
individual׳s intention to use social commerce
website,” Inf. Manag., vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 70–85,
2017.
[14] M. S. Featherman and N. Hajli, “Self-Service
Technologies and e-Services Risks in Social
Commerce Era,” J. Bus. Ethics, vol. 139, no. 2,
pp. 251–269, 2015.
[15] C. Pothong and C. Sathitwiriyawong, “Factors
of S-Commerce Influencing Trust and Purchase
Intention,” IEEE Trans. Eng. Manag., pp. 0–4,
2016.
[16] S. S. Abed, Y. K. Dwivedi, and M. D.
Williams, “Social commerce as a business tool
in Saudi Arabia’s SMEs,” Int. J. Indian Cult.
Bus. Manag., vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 1–19, 2016.
[17] S. Kim and H. Park, “Effects of various
characteristics of social commerce (s-
commerce) on consumers??? trust and trust
performance,” Int. J. Inf. Manage., vol. 33, no.
2, pp. 318–332, 2013.
[18] N. H. Azman, “5 major Concerns in online
purchase,” Utusan Malaysia, p. 17, 05-Apr-
2018.
[19] M. Shanmugam, S. Sun, A. Amidi, F. Khani,
and F. Khani, “The applications of social
commerce constructs,” Int. J. Inf. Manage., vol.
36, no. 3, pp. 425–432, 2016.
[20] W. S. Chow and S. Shi, “Understanding
Consumer Trust in Social Commerce
Websites,” Pacific Asia Conf. Inf. Syst. 2014
Proc., pp. 1–19, 2014.
[21] X. Lin, D. Zhang, and Y. Li, “Delineating the
dimensions of social support on social
networking sites and their effects: A
comparative model,” Comput. Human Behav.,
vol. 58, pp. 421–430, 2016.
[22] H. J. Hether, S. T. Murphy, and T. W. Valente,
“It’s Better to Give Than to Receive: The Role
of Social Support, Trust, and Participation on
Health-Related Social Networking Sites,” J.
Health Commun., vol. 19, no. 12, pp. 1424–
1439, 2014.
[23] Y. Wang and M. N. Hajli, “Co-creation in
branding through social commerce: The role of
social support, relationship quality and privacy
concerns,” 20th Am. Conf. Inf. Syst. AMCIS
2014, pp. 1–16, 2014.
[24] H. Ali, “Exchanging value within individuals’
networks: Social support implications for health
marketers,” J. Mark. Manag., vol. 27, no. 3–4,
pp. 316–335, 2011.
[25] B. Lakey and S. Cohen, “Social Support Theory
and Measurement,” Social Support
Measurement and Intervention: A Guide for
Health and Social Scientists. pp. 29–46,
2000.SSSS
[26] J. S. House, “Social support and social
structure,” Sociol. Forum, vol. 2, no. 1, pp.
135–146, 1987.
[27] C. Schaefer, J. C. Coyne, and R. S. Lazarus,
“The health-related functions of social
support.,” J. Behav. Med., vol. 4, no. 4, pp.
381–406, 1981.
[28] N. S. Coulson, “Receiving social support
online: an analysis of a computer-mediated
support group for individuals living with
irritable bowel syndrome.,” CyberPsychology
Behav., vol. 8, no. 6, pp. 580–4, 2005.
[29] M. Dashti, A. Sanayei, H. R. Dolatabadi, and
M. H. Moshrefjavadi, “An Analysis of Factors
Affecting Intention to Purchase Products and
Services in Social Commerce,” Mod. Appl. Sci.,
vol. 10, no. 12, p. 98, 2016.
[30] C. P. H. Langford, J. Bowsher, J. P. Maloney,
and P. P. Lillis, “Social support: A conceptual
analysis,” J. Adv. Nurs., vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 95–
100, 1997.
[31] M. N. Hajli, “A study of the impact of social
media on consumers,” Int. J. Mark. Res., vol.
56, no. 3, 2014.
[32] M. N. Hajli, “The role of social support on
relationship quality and social commerce,”
Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change, vol. 87, pp.
17–27, 2014.
[33] N. Hajli, X. Lin, M. Featherman, and Y. Wang,
“social word of mouth how trust develops in the
market,” Int. J. Mark. Res., vol. 56, no. 5, pp.
387–404, 2014.
[34] P. A. Pavlou, “Consumer Acceptance of
Electronic Commerce : Integrating Trust and
Risk with the Technology Acceptance Model,”
Int. J. Electron. Commer., vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 69–
103, 2003.
[35] L. V. Casaló, C. Flavián, and M. Guinalíu,
“Promoting consumer’s participation in virtual
Int. J Sup. Chain. Mgt Vol. 7, No. 5, October 2018
580
brand communities: A new paradigm in
branding strategy,” J. Mark. Commun., vol. 14,
no. 1, pp. 19–36, 2008.
[36] R. M. Morgan and S. D. Hunt, “The
Commitment-Trust Theory of Relationship
Marketing,” J. Mark., vol. 58, no. 3, pp. 20–38,
1994.
[37] A. F. Salam, L. Iyer, P. Palvia, and R. Singh,
“Trust in e-commerce,” Commun. ACM, vol.
48, no. 2, pp. 72–77, 2005.
[38] D. Gefen, D. W. Straub, and M.-C. Boudreau,
“Structural Equation Modeling and Regression :
Guidelines for Research Practice,” Commun.
Assoc. Inf. Syst., vol. 4, no. October, p. 7, 2000.
[39] S. W. Sussman, S. W. Sussman, W. S. Siegal,
and W. S. Siegal, “Informational In uence in
Organizations: An Integrated Approach to
Knowledge Adoption,” Inf. Syst. Res., vol. 14,
no. 1, pp. 47–65, 2003.
[40] D. Gefen, “E-commerce: The role of familiarity
and trust,” Omega, vol. 28, no. 6, pp. 725–737,
2000.
[41] J. H. Davis, R. C. Mayer, and F. D. Schoorman,
“An Integrative Model of Organizational Trust
Author ( s ): Roger C . Mayer , James H . Davis
and F . David Schoorman Source : The
Academy of Management Review , Vol . 20 ,
No . 3 ( Jul ., 1995 ), pp . 709-734 Published
by : Academy of Management Stable UR,” vol.
20, no. 3, pp. 709–734, 1995.
[42] M. Doney and J. P. Cannon, “Trust
Examination of the Nature of in Buyer-Seller
Relationship for assistance,” J. Mark., vol. 61,
no. 2, pp. 35–51, 1997.
[43] D. Gefen, E. Karahanna, and Detmar W.
Straub, “Trust and Tam in O Nline S Hopping :
an Integrated Model,” Misq, vol. 27, no. 1, pp.
51–90, 2003.
[44] M. Hajli, M. Hajli, and F. Khani, “Establishing
trust in social commerce through social word of
mouth,” Int. J. Inf. Sci. Manag., vol. 11, no.
SPL.ISS., pp. 39–53, 2013.
[45] D. H. Mcknight, L. L. Cummings, and N. L.
Chervany, “Initial Trust Formation in New
Organizational Relationships,” vol. 23, no. 3,
pp. 473–490, 1998.
[46] S. Ba and P. Pavlou A., “Evidence of the Effect
of Trust Building Technology in Electronic
Markets: Price Premiums and Buyer Behavior,”
MIS Q., vol. 26, no. 3, pp. 243–268, 2002.
[47] S. Kaiser and G. Müller-Seitz, “Leveraging lead
user knowledge in software development - The
case of weblog technology,” Ind. Innov., vol.
15, no. 2, pp. 199–221, 2008.
[48] N. Hajli, X. Lin, M. Featherman, and Y. Wang,
“social word of mouth how trust develops in the
market,” Int. J. Mark. Res., vol. 56, no. 5, pp.
387–404, 2014.
[49] V. A. Zeithaml, L. L. Berry, and A.
Parasuraman, “The Behavioral Consequences
of Service Quality,” Source J. Mark., vol. 60,
no. 2, pp. 31–46, 1996.
[50] C. E. J. Leo, C., Bennett, R., & Härtel, “Cross-
cultural differences in consumer decision-
making styles,” Cross Cult. Manag. An Int. J.,
vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 32–62, 2005.
[51] V. Venkatesh, M. G. Morris, G. B. Davis, and
F. D. Davis, “User Acceptance of Information
Technology: Toward a Unified View,” Source
MIS Q., vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 425–478, 2003.
[52] J.-S. Chiou, C. Droge, and S. Hanvanich, “Does
Customer Knowledge Affect How Loyalty is
Formed?,” J. Serv. Res., vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 113–
124, 2002.
[53] D. He, Y. Lu, and D. Zhou, “Empirical Study of
Consumers’ Purchase Intentions in C2C
Electronic Commerce,” Tsinghua Sci. Technol.,
vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 287–292, 2008.
[54] K. Mathieson, “Predicting user intentions:
Comparing the technology acceptance model
with the theory of planned behavior,” Inf. Syst.
Res., vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 173–191, 1991
[55] F. Davis, “Perceived usefulness, perceived ease
of use, and user acceptance of information
technology,” MIS Q., vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 319–
340, 1989.
[56] M. Fishbein and I. Ajzen, “Belief, Attitude,
Intention and Behaviour: An Introduction to
Theory and Research,” Read. MA
AddisonWesley, no. August, p. 480, 1975.
[57] N. Hajli, J. Sims, A. H. Zadeh, and M.-O.
Richard, “A social commerce investigation of
the role of trust in a social networking site on
purchase intentions,” J. Bus. Res., vol. 71, pp.
133–141, 2016.
[58] B. H. Gottlieb and A. E. Bergen, “Social
support concepts and measures,” J. Psychosom.
Res., vol. 69, no. 5, pp. 511–520, 2010.
[59] U. Pfeil and P. Zaphiris, “Investigating social
network patterns within an empathic online
community for older people,” Comput. Human
Behav., vol. 25, no. 5, pp. 1139–1155, 2009.
[60] X. Wang, C. Yu, and Y. Wei, “Social Media
Peer Communication and Impacts on Purchase
Intentions: A Consumer Socialization
Framework,” J. Interact. Mark., vol. 26, no. 4,
pp. 198–208, 2012.
[61] R. W. Naylor, C. P. Lamberton, and P. M.
West, “Beyond lthe ‘lke’ button: The impact of
mere virtual presence on brand evaluations and
purchase intention in social media settings,”
vol. 76, no. February, pp. 105–120, 2012.
[62] Y. Chen and J. Xie, “Third-Party Product
Review and Firm Marketing Strategy,” Mark.
Sci., vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 218–240, 2005.
[63] Paul w Ballantine and rachel j Stephenson,
“help me, i’m fat! social support in online
weight loss networks,” J. Consum. Behav.,
2011.
[64] K.-H. Prang, J. Berecki-Gisolf, and S. Newnam,
“The influence of social support on healthcare
service use following transport-related
musculoskeletal injury,” BMC Health Serv.
Res., vol. 16, no. 1, p. 310, 2016.
[65] A. Visvalingam, “Review on the Role of Social
Support in Health Information Systems,” pp. 1–
6, 2017.
[66] H.-H. Wang, S.-Z. Wu, and Y.-Y. Liu,
“Association Between Social Support and
Health Outcomes: A Meta-analysis,”
Kaohsiung J. Med. Sci., vol. 19, no. 7, pp. 345–
350, 2003.
Int. J Sup. Chain. Mgt Vol. 7, No. 5, October 2018
581
[67] C. M. Ridings and D. Gefen, “Virtual
Community Attraction: Why People Hang Out
Online,” doi.org, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 00–00,
Nov. 2004.
[68] J. Crocker and A. Canevello, “Creating and
undermining social support in communal
relationships: The role of compassionate and
self-image goals.,” J. Pers. Soc. Psychol., vol.
95, no. 3, pp. 555–575, 2008.
[69] K. Weber, A. Johnson, and M. Corrigan,
“Communcating emotional support and its
relationship to feelings of being understood,
trust, and self‐disclosure,” Commun. Res.
Reports, vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 316–323, 2004.
[70] H. H. Alshibly, “Customer Perceived Value in
Social Commerce : An Exploration of Its
Antecedents and Consequences,” vol. 7, no. 1,
pp. 17–37, 2015.
[71] P. A. Pavlou and L. Chai, “What Drives
Electronic Commerce across Cultures? A
Cross-Cultural Empirical Investigation of the
Theory of Planned Behavior.,” Jounal Electron.
Commer. Res., vol. 3, no. 4, pp. 240–253, 2002.
[72] R. M. Baron and D. a. Kenny, “The Moderator-
Mediator Variable Distinction in Social The
Moderator-Mediator Variable Distinction in
Social Psychological Research: Conceptual,
Strategic, and Statistical Considerations,” J.
Pers. Soc. Psychol., vol. 51, no. 6, pp. 1173–
1182, 1986.
[73] I. Reychav and J. Weisberg, “Bridging intention
and behavior of knowledge sharing,” J. Knowl.
Manag., vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 285–300, 2010.
[74] Y. Bai, Z. Yao, and Y.-F. Dou, “Effect of social
commerce factors on user purchase behavior:
An empirical investigation from renren.com,”
Int. J. Inf. Manage., vol. 35, no. 5, pp. 538–550,
2015.
[75] J. R. Lewis, “Multipoint Scales: Mean and
Median Differences and Observed Significance
Levels,” Int. J. Hum. Comput. Interact., vol. 5,
no. 4, pp. 383–392, 1993.
[76] P. A. Pavlou, M. Fygenson, P. A. Pavlou, and
M. Fygenson, “Understanding and Predicting
Electronic Commerce Adoption : An Extension
of the Theory of Planned Behavior Qjarteny
and Predicting Understanding Electronic An
Extension of Commerce Adoption : the Theory
of Planned formed,” vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 115–
143, 2006.
[77] N. Delafrooz, L. Paim, and A. Khatibi,
“Understanding Consumer’s Internet Purchase
Intention in Malaysia,” African J. Bus. Manag.,
vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 2837–2846, 2011.
[78] J. Masud, “Financial behavior and problems
among university students : Need for financial
education,” vol. 3, no. 1, 2004.
[79] U. Sekaran and R. Bougie, Research Methods
for Business: A Skill-Building Approach (5th
Edition). 2010.
[80] J. F. Hair, B. Black, B. Babin, R. E. Anderson,
and B. Ronald L. Tatham, Multivariate Data
Analysis, 7th ed. 2006.
[81] U. Sekaran, Research Methods for Business; A
skill business approach. New York: John Wiley
and Sons., 2003.
[82] J. C. Nunnally, Psychometric theory. New
York: McGraw-Hill Inc, 1978.
[83] K. P. Vatcheva, L. MinJae, J. B. McCormick,
and Mohammad H. Rahbar, “Multicollinearity
in Regression Analyses Conducted in
Epidemiologic Studies,” Epidemiol. Open
Access, vol. 6, no. 2, 2016.
[84] P. Allison, “When Can You Safely Ignore
Multicollinearity?,” Statistical Horizons, 2012.
[Online]. Available:
https://statisticalhorizons.com/multicollinearity.
[85] J. Durbin and G. S. Watson, “Testing for Serial
Correlation in Least Sqares Regression. II,”
Biometrika, vol. 38, no. 1, pp. 159–177, 1951.
[86] Alam, Syed Shah., A. K. M. Ismail, and S. A.
Hishamudidin, “Factors affecting e-commerce
adoption in the electronic manufacturing
companies in Malaysia,” Int. J. Commer.
Manag., vol. 17, no. 1/2, pp. 125–139, 2008.
[87] J. L. Chiu, N. C. Bool, and C. L. Chiu,
“Challenges and factors influencing initial trust
and behavioral intention to use mobile banking
services in the Philippines,” Asia Pacific J.
Innov. Entrep., vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 246–278,
2017.
[88] Y. Choi and D. Q. Mai, “The sustainable role of
the e-trust in the B2C e-commerce of Vietnam,”
Sustain., vol. 10, no. 1, 2018.
[89] M. Mital, D. Israel, and S. Agarwal,
“Information exchange and information
disclosure in social networking web sites,”
Learn. Organ., vol. 17, no. 6, pp. 479–490,
2010.
[90] H. Beyari, A. Abareshi, B. Boe, K. Almeroth,
and B. Zhao, “The conceptual framework of the
factors influencing consumer satisfaction in
social commerce,” J. Dev. Areas, vol. 50, no. 6,
pp. 365–376, 2016.
[91] D. Gefen and D. W. Straub, “Consumer trust in
B2C e-Commerce and the importance of social
presence: Experiments in e-Products and e-
Services,” Omega, vol. 32, no. 6, pp. 407–424,
2004.
[92] Dong Hee Shin, “The effects of trust, security
and privacy in social networking: A security-
based approach to understand the pattern of
adoption,” Interact. Comput., vol. 22, no. 5, pp.
428–438, Sep. 2010.
